CHRIST’S INCARNATION
Christ became incarnate or, which is the same thing, became man to put Himself in a capacity for working out our redemption. For though Christ as God was infinitely sufficient for the work, yet to His being in an immediate capacity for it, it was needful that He should not only be God, but man. If Christ had remained only in the divine nature, He would not have been in a capacity to have obtained our salvation; not from any imperfection of the divine nature, but by reason of its absolute and infinite perfection: for Christ, merely as God, was not capable either of that obedience or suffering that was needful.
The divine nature is not capable of suffering; for it is infinitely above all suffering. Neither is it capable of obedience to that law which was given to man. It is as impossible that One, who is only God, should obey the law that was given to man, as it is that He should suffer man’s punishment.
And it was necessary not only that Christ should take upon him a created nature, but that He should take upon Him our nature. It would not have sufficed for Christ to have become an angel, and to have obeyed and suffered in the angelic nature. But it was necessary that He should become a man, upon three accounts:
1. It was needful in order to answer the law, that the very nature to which the law was given, should obey it. Man’s law could not be answered but by being obeyed by man. God insisted upon it that the law, which He had given to man, should be honoured and fulfilled by the nature of man, otherwise the law could not be answered for men. The words, “Thou shalt not eat thereof,” etc., were spoken to the race of mankind, to the human nature; and therefore the human nature must fulfil them.
2. It was needful to answer the law that the nature that sinned should die. These words, “Thou shalt surely die,” respect the human nature. The same nature to which the command was given was that to which the threatening was directed.
3. God saw meet that the same world, which was the stage of man’s fall and ruin, should also be the stage of his redemption. We read often of His coming into the world to save sinners, and of God’s sending Him into the world for this purpose. It was needful that He should come into this sinful, miserable, undone world in order to restore and save it. For man’s recovery, it was needful that He should come down to man, to man’s proper habitation, and that He should tabernacle with us: “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.”
Remembrance Sunday is not just about the fallen – it is about nationhood
REMEMBRANCE Sunday is a solemn reminder of our distinctive identity and culture as one of the most important occasions in Britain’s national life. Its ceremonies are carried out in the context of a national and constitutional alignment with the historic Christian faith according to the Scriptures.
The contemporary liberal establishment, the elite class which now dominates all aspects of our national life, has, tragically, no comprehension either of this meaning or of the enormous benefits the Christian faith has brought to Britain, not least in the development of our parliamentary democracy.
Biblical Christianity, when keenly embraced by even just some of a nation’s citizens, carries with it an immense purifying influence on the greater whole – it is a source of salt and light, to use the Biblical metaphors. It makes society gentler and more wholesome. It makes the country a good place to live in. As King Solomon, inspired by the Holy Spirit, tells us, ‘Righteousness exalteth a nation’ (Proverbs 14:34). To cite a single example, it was not globalist secularists who initiated all the great social reforms of the 19th century, it was Bible-believing Christians.
The Bible has much to say about individual countries with distinctive borders; and it is abundantly clear that God deals with nations as nations. For example, in Isaiah 13-23 we have separate prophetic announcements concerning the God-ordained futures of ten different countries. So God judges individual nations in different ways according to whether or not they honour Him. Therefore, it is not remotely ‘unChristian’ for those belonging to a specific nation to have a distinctly national perspective. Furthermore, it needs to be emphasised that the very concept of nationhood ceases to have meaning if national borders are not controlled rigorously.
What was it that the honourable fallen whom we especially remember today actually died for if it was not the defence of their country’s borders and their unique cultural identity and way of life?
Another benefit they fought for and was worth fighting for was the personal freedom to hold views other than those the state tries to impose; something that was a major factor in being British. We now, however, live in a society where to maintain national identity is not valued at all, and where personal freedom of conscience is seriously under threat where, for example, Christians are losing their jobs for not accepting the dictates of LGBT activism. A society which bans silent prayer in public spaces.
There is enormous ignorance in modern Britain concerning the doctrine of God’s providence in respect of the destiny of nations. Many today might laugh in disbelief at the highly significant role which prayer played in getting through of some of the most challenging and testing times during World War Two. There were no fewer than 12 national days of prayer during the war, which were widely supported, as shown by packed churches up and down the land. People were humbled by the Nazi threat and the horrors of another war so relatively soon after the Great War. They realised that the ultimate solution lay not just in strong political leadership and military might, but in belief: that the hand of the sovereign God was also at work, and that His aid had to be sought.
Those days of prayer speak to us of a distinctive and unifying national identity linked unashamedly to the Christian faith. The modern idols of diversity and multiculturalism, along with rampant secularism and the abandonment of the Bible by compromised churches have, together, destroyed this Christian identity. Today such exclusively Christian national days of prayer would, perversely, be deemed harmful to social cohesion, or even unfair, because people of other faiths or no faith reside in the land.
In fact many in government as well as opposition circles deeply regret Britain’s departure from the European Union and would seek to draw us back into the EU fold and its globalist approach to political action. How many of the political leaders publicly paying their respects today as they should do, to the fallen, believe any longer in national self-determination as a fundamental and inalienable principle? How many understand that God Himself ordained nationhood from the earliest times in the world’s history, as is clearly demonstrated in Genesis 9-11?
Globalism, not nationalism, is the order of the day. The contemporary ‘progressive’ preference with politicians is for defining and tackling problems through global organisations such as the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the World Health Organisation (WHO), rather than through the national parliament of a United Kingdom at Westminster.
This desire to dilute and emasculate British identity is also seen at the other end of the spectrum, in the agenda for further devolution and regionalisation of the UK, from citizens assemblies to a Council of the Nations and Regions as opposed to the single national gathering of parliament.